Positioning and movement of Aimar, Mata and Gaitan in Chelsea 2-1 Benfica

April 5, 2012

The starting line-ups

Chelsea have progressed into the Champions League semi-finals after a 2-1 victory over Benfica, winning 3-1 on aggregate.

The game wasn’t as interesting as it could have been, mainly because of Benfica’s indiscipline. Javi Garcia’s clumsy tackle on Ashley Cole resulted in a penalty and an uphill struggle, then Maxi Pereira picked up a silly second booking to leave Benfica down to ten men before half time. They struggled on manfully, and did well with ten, but the game (and tie) was a little disappointing.

However, this was a game featuring three very intelligent playmakers: Pablo Aimar, Juan Mata and Nicolas Gaitan. The latter two owe much to Aimar – Mata has described him as his favourite player when younger, while Gaitan has clearly benefited from playing alongside him at Benfica. All are technically gifted, are 5′7, have great balance and good appreciation of space.

It was that final quality that was most obvious in this game. The match was surprisingly open – partly because Chelsea went with a much more attacking line-up than in Portugal, while Benfica needed to score, so pushed forward. This meant plenty of space for the three playmakers.

Aimar

Aimar was brilliant here, the catalyst for Benfica’s excellent attacking moves in the first half. He was up against John Obi Mikel, and frequently burst past the Nigerian, particularly towards the left. Chelsea’s problem here was that Mikel was left to fend for himself – Frank Lampard played too high up, particularly at the start of the game. Lampard was trying to get tight to Axel Witsel, and with the Belgian moving laterally across the pitch, Lampard often followed. Aimar found space behind him, and had plenty of shots.

The positioning in the Chelsea midfield was odd – at kick-off, Lampard lined up directly ahead of Mikel, and that’s pretty much what happened throughout the game, with Mata also in a central position higher up. Chelsea’s midfield was essentially three men in a vertical line, and Aimar made the most of the space to either side, constantly playing good, direct forward passes.

Mata

Juan Mata was fielded as the central playmaker in a 4-2-3-1, in a system where the wide players dropped back to help out the full-backs and form a second bank of four (rather than in the 4-2-3-1 briefly used by Andre Villas-Boas, where the wide players pressed the full-backs and left the defending to the deeper six players). As such, Mata was the closest support to Fernando Torres throughout the game.

His positioning was interesting, because the natural man to pick him up was Nemanja Matic, Benfica’s deepest midfielder. However, Matic was playing as the left-of-centre midfielder, with Witsel to his right. Therefore, it didn’t suit the task of picking up Mata, who tends to move to Chelsea’s left. He did that here, and picked up the ball unchallenged towards the left flank, in particular.

The other way Mata tested Matic positionally was to move very high up the pitch – a little like Mesut Ozil at the World Cup – and basically move into such an advanced zone that Matic felt uncomfortable following. With Benfica’s makeshift centre-back pairing focusing on maintaining a spare man against Torres, Mata often became free in the centre of the pitch. He was caught offside three times in the first half – so he wasn’t quite timing his runs correctly, but he was making the right runs.

Mata's varied positioning - despite playing as a number ten, he barely ever picked the ball up in a central position, and instead ventured to the flanks. Three times he did get the ball in a central zone were when moving high up the pitch and getting caught offside

Gaitan

The most interesting movement was that of Gaitan, the Benfica left-winger. He was up against Branislav Ivanovic, who was very cautious in coming out from the back four. On the other flank, Ashley Cole is a natural full-back and very mobile, and covers a large amount of ground when shutting down a winger – he can move high up the pitch, or a long way out to the flank.

Ivanovic is a converted centre-back and prefers to stay tight to the right-sided centre-back, in this case David Luiz. This meant that Gaitan had time and space to come inside into the centre of the pitch and pick the ball up to the side of Mikel, and combine with Aimar.

The different areas covered by Ivanovic and Cole

It also meant that Gaitan often got into strange, wide and deep positions when Benfica had possession, into a zone where Ivanovic didn’t want to venture out to. The positions of his attempted take-ons (dribbles) are very deep, and he tended to get the ball and then drift around the outside of Ivanovic when he got up to full speed, before crossing the ball.

Chelsea’s imbalance in the full-back positions wasn’t a huge problem because of the different roles of the wide players. Ivanovic was static but had the energy of Ramires ahead of him to help out, while Salomon Kalou could stay higher up the pitch on Chelsea’s left.

At 1-0 (2-0 aggregate),especially in the second half, I would have thought that Benfica would push up and play a high line so as not to allow the Chelsea defense more time on the ball to just pass it around and eat up time, alas Benfica just retreated close to their D-line when the ball was lost.

I could never understand this tactic as to me it showed a lack of courage or risk taking on the part of the Benfica technical team.

Nikolal on April 5, 2012 at 1:10 am

“The positioning in the Chelsea midfield was odd – at kick-off, Lampard lined up directly ahead of Mikel”

I think that Di Mateo was copying Benfica’s Midfield so he could man mark all of them easily.
Witsel is Always higher than J.Garcia (or Matic in this match). And Aimar is the highest up field of all three.

I am delighted with Benfica this season. Great result for them and some really exiting football.

Ian on April 5, 2012 at 4:47 am

They lost because of silly errors, in a game they could of won with 11 men. How do you conclude it was a great result?

david on April 5, 2012 at 12:59 pm

The referee didn’t help, the Benfica players were clearly perturbed by the apparently different standards applied to the two teams in respect to yellow cards awarded.

What was interesting was how Benfica clearly outplayed Chelsea when it was 11 vs 11 despite having a budget a fraction of the size of Chelsea’s.

Nikolal on April 6, 2012 at 2:46 am

I meant that quarter-final is a great result for Benfica’s team.

matt on April 5, 2012 at 3:00 am

there’s an error in the paragraph about Aimar. you’re talking about Aimar, but call him Mata a few times. It wouldn’t make sense for Mata to exploit the space behind Lampard

Rustum on April 5, 2012 at 4:26 am

Ya I got quite confused there too, please correct the error ZM

subjectiveobjective on April 5, 2012 at 3:43 am

The point about Ivanovic & Cole’s different zones or styles of defending is one which almost cost Chelsea last weekend. Albrighton came on for Villa in the second half and Ivanovic was often caught in too narrow a position and failed to get tight to the winger who crossed for the goal to make it 2-2. Had Gaitan’s crossing been a little more precise Cardozo may have had a little more to celebrate.

He also offers little technical ability in attack and it will be very interesting if Guardiola decides to go with Puyol at left-back in the semi-final as he did in both legs of the Milan tie. Then we’d have two full-backs on the same flank staying deep and narrow with the opposite flank having two of the world’s best rampaging full-backs going head-to-head.

It may not matter at all though if Lampard leaves Mikel as exposed in the centre as he did tonight. For all his improvement in this latter part of the season he’s still too easily exposed when pressed with intent – and if there’s anything Barca do well besides one-touch passing it’s intense midfield pressing.

For all the good this Champions League run has done for Chelsea’s confidence I fear it may all come crashing down around them next week. I’m petrified…

Ian on April 5, 2012 at 4:58 am

Chelsea should be praying for a Barca off night. Mikel and Lampard successfully made Aimar look like Alessandro Del Piero circa 2001.

Manamongst on April 9, 2012 at 9:57 am

The guy (Aimar) is still good and to be fair, if Wenger was to pick him up instead of a certain over priced Frenchman (M’Vila), he’d be better off and would probably be just as effective as a healthy Silva. Don’t sleep. But yes I do get wha you’re saying…The Chelsea luck will implode, and I smell a B squad vs B squad mauling of chelsea in the second leg…Piazon, Hutchinson and Lukaku, thrown to the wolves…with a Cuenca hattrick will probably be par for the course…

afriqdusud on April 5, 2012 at 6:38 am

I think Guardialo will employ a flexible 4-3-3 to 3-4-3ish formation with Puyol tucking in to form a back three with Masch., Puyol and Pique, the latter having shed off his niggling injury offcourse.

Mac on April 5, 2012 at 8:08 am

“It may not matter at all though if Lampard leaves Mikel as exposed”

Good point, I think it would be ridiculous for him to start alongside mikel.Di mateo might use a defensively solid double pivot infront of the back four, maybe mikel and essien(I dont know if he is anywhere near the physical presence he once was) or the energetic meireles.

Looking at chelseas squad, despite them not being among the elite teams I think they still have quality and options in defence. I wont be too quick to pencil them in the final just yet. The past decade chelsea has done reasonably well vs barca, I expect the usual. Park that London Bus and try to sneak a cheeky goal through a set piece/counter.

If pep makes bad gamble tactically and Di mateo sets up his matchups correctly chelsea can have a say.

Sturridge vs high line-who’s gonna make the pass and with what time. Daniel is not intelligent and patient enough to come off their trap free…if they had someone with the comfort and time to pull it off.

Essien vs Inesta-they will sucker Essien out of position with about 12 touches and at a moment’s notice attack that acre of space they have managed to drift him out of.

Ramires vs Alves- One word: Crocked. Hasn’t been healthy in weeks, and hopefully the illness this week buys him more time but with Fulham coming I can’t see them winning that without him. Too many tough decisions for RDM. Cn seriously see Cuenca and Alves being the 3rd and 4th strikers again…not good news for Chelsea fans at all.

David Luiz beating the barca pressing-Only thing that can happen here are mistakes…he will be tucked in like a baby…

David B on April 5, 2012 at 2:47 pm

I also enjoyed the bit about Ivanovic and Cole’s zones of coverage. For those of you who watch Barcelona regularly, do you think Ivanovic’s tendency to stick close to his centre back will be a weakness? And perhaps Ferreira should play? Or do Barcelona often play down the centre and thus having an extra body in this zone will work in Chelsea’s favour?

Manamongst on April 9, 2012 at 10:13 am

Ummm

Yes and Hell yes! Whether he plays CB or RB he will have problems, less at CB. But at RB I can see him letting about 12 balls behind him to Cuenca with his hand raised or watching Fabregas slip into the space inside and generlly being turned around and being rounded by Cuenca, Messi and Iniesta at every turn.

Iason on April 5, 2012 at 3:45 am

So it’s Chelsea vs Barcelona in the semis. This time the first leg will be at Stamford Bridge. I feel really scared for whoever will have to ref that first leg. He’ll probably receive a death threat for every call he makes against Chelsea…

Manamongst on April 9, 2012 at 10:17 am

It won’t be that hard, they will be physical high not low…a lot of bullying and pushing off balls, but in general it will be a passing clinic with about two penos for Messi. UEFA has a fantasy game, lets just say I grabbed Cuenca for the third striker position at a bargain for 4.5 mil., Iniesta, Messi (captained of course) with Fabs and Alves! Anything less than 6 goals for them at Stamford I will be disappointed…

These are in fact great ideas in about blogging. You have touched some fastidious
factors here. Any way keep up wrinting.

Joe Fine on April 5, 2012 at 9:07 am

Wow. I know it’s very fashionable to hate on English teams at moment, and it is clear that that they have falled behind the Spanish Big 2 (like every other team in the world), but I’m really tired of reading articles not willing to English teams any credit at all. The way this reads, you’d have expected Benfica to have comfortably overcome Chelsea… There is so little objectivity in football writing at the moment – either English teams are completely written off as neanderthal and old-fashioned or Spanish teams (with other decent Italian and German teams being heaped on the same bandwagon)are written off as fancy-shmancy entertainers with no substance. Why can’t you guys just report the truth – that, as as always, there are a number of top teams in Europer, with Barca (over the last few seasons) and Real (this season) on top?

Patrick on April 5, 2012 at 10:26 am

Maybe part of the reason Chelsea aren’t getting much credit is the fact that they’ve got a ludicrously expensive team, paid for by a Russian billionaire, and they were up against one of the geuinely big clubs in Europe.

Benfica are the real thing; Lot’s of fans, great tradition of success, play nice football. Chelsea are nothing of the sort. They’re an average club with a team playing poor footbal who don’t really deserve to be at this stage of the CL.

How could anyone watch Chelsea take the field last night, with one of Benfica’s best players from last year in their line-up, and want them to win? It was just like when they played Valencia this season and the commentators went wild with delight after Chelsea goals. Well done, your financially doped club managed to beat Valencia, a team whose best player you’ve just bought with money you didn’t earn.

Joe on April 5, 2012 at 11:57 am

why you so bitter mate? because chelsea is the only survivor from england teams, and your favorite teams are watching from television? grow up mate, football in 21st century is prime commodity of sport industry. financial power and clever management is the key to take glory on the pitch.

classical tradition team somehow unable to just rely on great talents from players and their legendary manager, financial crisis can destroy the fate of classical club. remember the famous leeds united, managed by david o’leary, filled with players like alan smith, harry kewell, mark viduka. where are they now? not even in Premier League (no offense to Leeds United fans).

money can help your club into paths of glory, and entering spots into one of the classical club you’ve said earlier. well thanks for money, football competition won’t be boring and monopolistic, dominated by the old classical club. sometimes big clubs are corrupted though (i refer to calciopoli)

Patrick on April 5, 2012 at 2:37 pm

Let’s not put Chelsea’s achievments down to ‘clever managment’. Chelsea’s recent success is no more down to clever managment than a lottery winner’s wealth is due to a wise investment strategy. Chelsea have been handed hundreds of millions of pounds by a guy who wanted to own a football club. They lucked out, it could equally have happened to any EPL team you care to mention. Although I will admit their vast wealth allows them to buy clever managers, that’s not what you were talking about though.

Benfica, like many of the traditionally big clubs in Europe have found themselves in a predicament that has very little to do with their own failings and everything to do with a shifting power structure in Europe. It’s not Benfica’s fault that English teams get so much more TV money than the Portugese, and it’s certainly not their fault that Abramovic decided to spend money on Chelsea.

Benfica are one of the biggest clubs in the world. Far, far, bigger than Chelsea. Their money comes from fans who’ve decided to put money into the club. There’s democracy in that, fairness. Any club can strive to increase its fanbase. That’s when clever managment really does build success; when teams can create something special through sporting achievement, which leads to more fans, which leads to more success and so on. Benfica had been doing this, they had been a big club who won things. Chelsea could’ve done this too, but didn’t. Instead they’ve spent hundreds of millions of pounds that ahve come from Abramovic’s dubiously obtained personal wealth. But I wont go into that.

Watching Chelsea and Man City in England and in the Champion’s League just leaves me cold. What penalties for failure do these clubs incur? If they flop they just go out and spend more money that they didn’t earn. Fans paying £70 per ticket in Chelsea’s case, and fans who weren’t interested a few short years ago in Man City’s (not all, but many) watching their team skip the queue. Celebrating their club beating a real football team like Benfica, a team who belong in the later stages of The Champion’s League. Watching their team line up with David Luiz in the side. Well done, you took one of Benfica’s stars from them then beat them. Some achievment.

As for the ‘football won’t be boring and monopolistic’; European football has never been more predictable than it is today. There are only about 8 teams who are capable of reaching the final of the Champion’s League. And the only way for a new club to enter this category is for another billionaire to buy them over and throw money at them. Inflating even more the wages and transfer fees of the top players. Making it harder and harder for anyone to compete with the rich clubs.

Maybe I am just bitter. But when I’m watching Chelsea vs PSG, or Chelsea vs Man City in the Champion’s League final in a couple of years, I’ll enjoy the good players and the skill on show, I might even enjoy the game, but I I’ll know it’s not really a competition. It’s billionaires battling it out to see who’s got the best team of all-stars. It’s football franchises competing for a trophy that used to be the pinicle of success but is now just a piece of jewellery that only the very richest can afford to buy.

What you fail to accept is the fact that football is a business. Traditions in football clubs is great and is an added bonus if clubs have had success many years ago. But as a business, football clubs are always looking to maximize profit and their product (players and performance).

This is a capitalist world we live in. Get with the times or live in the past.

Patrick on April 5, 2012 at 10:56 pm

rondo

What Chelsea and Man City are doing is not capitalism. Both clubs run at a massive, massive loss. They are not businesses, they’re billionaire’s playtings.

Man City are funded by a Royal family. Think about that; they’re spending their people’s money on football players. How would the British public feel if The Queen spent £x00mill on NBA or NFL players! Do you think that’s acceptable. Is it okay that Man City are funded with the resources that have been syphoned off by unelected leaders? Maybe I just need to get with the times…

As for Chelsea; Abramovic is called an ‘oligarch’ for a reason. And, by the way, that’s not a Russian word for ‘oil barron’, like many seem to think. An oligarchy is a country ruled by the wealthy, Abramovic is one of those people. He did not pay the going rate for the oil he now controls. That was not obtained by him in a free-market environment. Again Abramovic’s wealth, like that of Sheikh Mansour, comes from natural resources of his homeland, natural resources that would be used to pay for schools and hospitals had they not been effectively stolen by a select few.

Don’t talk to me about ‘the world we live in’. We live in a democratic country where the natural resources and wealth are (generally) used for the common good.

But we don’t mind when money is stolen from the public of other nations just so long as it’s good for the EPL.

Joe on April 6, 2012 at 8:46 am

well, i suppose somewhat agree with your arguments, but let me clear up some points. because you mention “democracy” in football world, and “capitalism”, i take that two words seriously. you state that democracy is equivalent with fairness, well for me, in football world, democracy is not exist. if democracy exists, there will be no big clubs, mediocre clubs, and small clubs, also rich clubs and poor clubs. if the crazy billionaire won’t put their dirty money, football world still consists of big clubs oligarchy.
in terms of europe, when was the last time the not-big clubs reached the semifinals? last season we saw schalke 04, representatives of bundesliga elites. again, the biggest surprise in UCL was the triumph of porto, mourinho’s side in 2004. here, you can stab me because chelsea choose mourinho as a manager, guilty decision because mou prefer towards money rather than loyalty from the clubs that he loved. but, again, it’s not entirely the crazy billionaire fault when porto slumped next season in europe. another big clubs hijacks their stars, chelsea took carvalho and ferreira, but deco is signed by barcelona!
that is exactly my point here, what’s the difference between big-rich clubs and crazy billionaire clubs? because big clubs are financially superior, the likes of real madrid, barcelona, milan, juventus, manchester united and so on are always have rights to signed talented players from lower clubs? when non-big clubs shocked the domination of classic clubs in europe, next season their stars already wears the sacred jersey of classic clubs. it is the nature of capitalism and democracy isn’t it? it’s not fairness, but the strongest able to compete with other strongmen. oh no, it’s just nature of football world, and i can live with that.
well, don’t forget the fact after abramovich take over in chelsea, crazy billionaire also invests heavily on big clubs, take liverpool, man united. even in italy, the big three, juventus, milan, and inter already owned by oligarch of strongmen, also roma now is funded by another billionaires. let’s not forget how some managers prefer to spend so much money to buy players (redknapp in england, magath in germany) maybe i’m just bitter too, watching talented players from lower side like bayer leverkusen ends up in red jersey of manchester united (berbatov) and these side slumping in europe without their key players.
i think, most of all, that football world need to learn about fair competition, as we see in germany bundesliga, when the league winners rotating fairy well. but, these example of germany also invite critics because (another) oligarchy of western germany clubs in bundesliga, when former east germany clubs not yet reached the same level.

Qwe on April 6, 2012 at 10:47 pm

Is this the Guardian or a football tactics site?

Tom on April 8, 2012 at 5:00 am

Even in the years before Abramovich, Chelsea were ascending up the domestic ladder, just like Tottenham have in the last few years. Money only gave them the extra push.

Also as far as i see it, it doesn’t matter. It seems stupid to me that you consider a club better because they used to be good. Your views are archaic and you don’t seem to understand the world we live in much. Also, Chelsea make more revenue then Benfica.

Manamongst on April 9, 2012 at 9:51 am

Ummm Rondo, it appears clearly that he DOES accept that it is a business, it was a business before, what he was trying to explain to people like YOU, is that the business model is being whored. Almost like the reverse-Walmartization of football. When Walmart comes into a town in America they make it impossible for others to compete via price reductions. The teams he highlights are inflating the game’s going rate.
It’s not the world-class players that will sink the City’s it will be the over-priced working wings and marginal players that don’t deserve their checks.

Drogbas BBC on April 5, 2012 at 9:10 am

Were you looking at a poster of Mata when you wrote the Aimar section?
Good stuff though

super dooper bilbao trooper on April 5, 2012 at 11:00 am

BIG mention to Joan Capdevilla, his game time has been limited this season, but he displayed an excellent level of quality when crossing the ball. As good as anyone I have seen in a number of years, pity he can’t just be positioned on the touchline to whip crosses in, but then there is that pesky defending thing to think about…

Riccardo on April 5, 2012 at 11:37 am

Hadn’t seen Aimar play in ages before last night and he was entgralling at times. Fantastic footballer.

Yeah, I was gushing over him last night as well. Exactly my kind of player, so elegant and skillful.

higly biased benfica supporter on April 5, 2012 at 12:12 pm

benfica’s indiscipline? how can you analyse this game without looking at the refereeing? now i want to see chelsea supporters complaining about uefa and referees. obi mikel shoud’ve been sent out with two yellow cars and benfica player receives a yellow card for protests. john terry in the first game plays the ball with his hand, no penalty; and now garcia gains the ball lawfully and surprise surprise, its a penalty.

in the end, the team with more chances and possession was the one with more yellow cars and fouls. unbelievable.

i understand that this wonderful (and i truly mean this) website is focused only in tactics, but the big point of yesterday was how a referee put a team out of the competition.

Thought Benfica really missed having Garcia up against Mata in midfield, meant they were really open in front of their defense.

While Mikel was poor against Aimar, left him loads of room when all he needed to do was track him. I thought it was more Mikel being poor rather than Aimar being good, Mikel has fallen so far below his past performances.

Yeah but his passes lacked any sort of ambition, which wouldn’t be a problem if he wasn’t with Lampard who was never gonna provide that sort of passing either. It meant Chelsea struggled to create from deep and had to rely on Mata dropping deep to get the ball.

Defensively he should get credit as Lampard left him all alone in front of the defense, but I think he let his direct opponent have too much effect on the game.

AO GTK on April 5, 2012 at 8:31 pm

Mikel was good last night, Lampard gave as much protection as a sieve. Towards the end of the game he pushed up playing a lovely through ball through to Kalou or Cole!

I think its easy to forget that Mikel was an attacking midfielder converted to DM by Jose. And he won most valuable player after Messi at the junior world cup a while back

Credit where credits due, he did an admirable job considering he was exposed! Lampard was either being lazy or was ignorant!

That opening you speak of wasn’t about the position of Javi, It’s a recurrent flaw in Benfica’s strategy. I scrutinized the subject in my website. Besides, Matic was definitely the best player of the Portuguese side yesterday. Yes, even better than Aimar. He held, by himself, the defensive midfield of a shorthanded team against a theoretically superior one, covering an impressive amount of field, also being quite solid on the ball. I had little expectations about him, yesterday he proved me wrong.

The odd thing about Benfica’s game was they were fearless and much stronger in the 50 mins when they were with to 10 men, than in the whole rest of the tie. Furthermore, while the least used (Capdevila, Matic, Yannick) were superb and out of position players (Javi, Emerson) were OK, some of the more influential, especially Maxi, Gaitán and Cardozo, were disappointing.

I would respectively disagree. Matic was good in possession I would accept, mostly as Mata was poor at pressing him so he was left free most of the time. But defensively, the player he should have picked up was Mata and he didn’t, Mata ended up having a great game. Garcia would have done a much better job I feel, and Benfica were unlucky that they had their CB’s out.

I also though Gaitan did okay, he created quite a few opportunities and combined well with Aimar. He also had to deal Ramires helping to double up on him and for me was one of the most dangerous players on the pitch.

Chelsea were lucky to win this, and a full strength Benfica side tonight might have won this.

I respect your opinion, but I look to the teams as blocks, and I believe in the zonal marking. Mata was often off Matic’s zone. I don’t value much those man-to-man talks in my appreciation of the players. I value the ability to read the game properly, apply pressure in the right moment, shorten the spaces, make key interceptions, and in this aspects, Matic performed very well yesterday. Mata is a wonderful player able to trouble any defense, you can’t blame a single opponent player for that. Besides, Benfica was losing so they have to send as many men forward as possible and this allied to the adaptations and the 10vs11 situation, created plenty of ground for Mata and Kalou to explore. But overall, I belive Benfica players were heroes due to the implications of the match and achieved a great moral victory, which can be important for the remainder of the season.

I have this feeling about this competition for a long time, I believe that before every Champions League match, the officials are ‘instructed’ about the it, and if necessary, ‘facilitate’ the victory for the club that will generate more money for UEFA. In almost every game I noticed a double standard criteria from referees on behalf of the most mediatic team. You may call me crazy or conspiracy theorist but I think this ‘policy’ was determinant in this tie, like in some others.

UEFA considered that at least one English club should be in the semi-finals. In fact, it’s the country that generates more profits in the world of football and this noble organization couldn’t lose a proeminent market like this for the remainder of the Champions League. In portugal there’s no money neither to ring the bells, then Chelsea would have to win no matter what. There are many millions at stake and this is a business, so like in any other, what is valued are the benefits, not the sporting merits. PLATHETIC.

Mahmut on April 5, 2012 at 11:31 pm

I think it is always easy to make a theory after the fact. Chelsea is there, one English team is there, so money must be at issue. Well, what about Real Madrid? Before last year, they could not make the quarter finals even though millions were invested in them and they had a much larger audience that the three British dominating teams then, Chelsea, ManU (well maybe ManU exception) and Liverpool. What about Porto-Monaco final. Why are British teams down now?
What about APOEL, or Marseille, or Basel eliminating Man U. Again, a team with a lot of money will always make it far… RM, Barca, Bayern and Chelsea all have a lot of money… but the correlation does not necessarily mean that there is a conspiracy. Especially when you are willing to adjust your argument in all sorts of ways.

Finally, a discussion often heard is that Chelsea is not a real team, or ManCity, but teams like Benfica are. I disagree personally. I think the new money in the industry have brought positive rather than negative changes. It has added an additional factor of complexity, which in my opinion is always a good thing.
People talk like the old days were days when money did not matter… money mattered then also, reputation also, teams like Juventus and Milan dominated the Italian league. I would have absolutely no problem if a billionaire buys Parma and Parma competes at the upper echelons… it is a positive disruption on the old “oligarchies,” and from a purely football fan perspective it adds complexity by bringing new players and seeing how the coach deals with making a team out of them.

I didn’t built this theory based in this game. You referred the Monaco-Porto final, in that time Platini wasn’t ahead of UEFA. Man Utd was eliminated in the group stage, not a big problem since other english clubs should go through, in this early stages it’s not transcendent if a big club goes down since there are others from the same country to keep that specific market. The APOEL case is easy to explain: Lyon advanced surrounded by odd happenings in their group, so something similar against APOEL would be yet a greater scandal, and the success of APOEL proves Platini’s model to open Champions League to minor league champions was right. If you remind the latter years editions, all the polemic arrived in semi-finals matches, as the teams which served UEFA interests better in that particular moment should reach the final (the Chelsea-Barcelona was the greatest exemple, but in the following years strange stuff happened too) but this year was different: Tuesday they lost Italy, and if Chelsea was eliminated they would lose England too, and something like that would a big hole in the accounts.

The Barcelona case is funny since everybody is talking about a UEFA-Barça connection, but that’s not quite it, it’s just about the money and reputation of this exclusive and extremely hard to win tournament. In fact, since adopted the name of Champions League, no team was able to win it twice. Something that must be easy to achieve for Barcelona as they are one of the best teams ever, nevertheless after the scandal of 2008, in 2009 against Inter the impaired were them, and finally in 2010 it was his year of glory again beating deservedly but with the typical arbitral help, the only team who could have a chance to beat them, Real Madrid. So if i had to guess this year Champion, Barcelona wouldn’t be my first hint, unless UEFA is ready to recognize that they are in fact the best team in football’s history.

I honestely hope all of this I’m writing is bulls***, this is the best competition of clubs in the whole world, and every year offers us, the lovers of this beautiful game, intense carousels of emotions, but what I observe when the competition reach these final stages are referees, more or less discreetly, with double standards and a sense of suspicion sense invades my brain making me fear for the truthfulness of all this.

Keith on April 6, 2012 at 1:37 am

Sorry but there was no conspiracy in this game. Benfica were out of control. The truth is officials should yellow card players when they gang up around the official after every call. Cole was clearly fouled in the box, penalty, Pereira could have easily gotten a straight red for his tackle on Cole, a 2nd yellow was light. Benfica were the better side (I say this as a Chelsea fan) but their emotions were out of control and cost them. I think this negative energy started right after the first match when Benfica’s manager was going on and on about how Benfica were better and 1-0 was the wrong score and so on. Benfica felt entitled to winning this but weren’t winning. With the exception of a couple of yellow cards, every call was correct.

Just because players on the peninsula are accustomed to accosting the official after every call doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be carded for dissent.

Cogito on April 6, 2012 at 3:05 pm

As if English players don’t do this?

Brave Englishmen would never ever try and influence an official in order to win their side a decision. Never ever.

I don’t buy the argument that UEFA is fixing the latter stages of the competition for the benefit of clubs like Chelsea or Barcelona. There is plenty of awful refereeing (the Barca-Milan ref was absolutely awful, even discounting the penalty decisions: yellow card for Mascherando’s clean tackle?). But if you English posters are wondering why there is so much schadenfreude at every failure you suffer, look no further than this comment to indicate why (not to tar all, of course).

Even when you make a legitimate argument about the match, you manage to reduce it to a ridiculous, ignorant ethnic stereotype in the end. So pleasant.

rahul on April 5, 2012 at 3:17 pm

other than aimar , gaitan and mata there was one more thing that was obvious and it had left your observation while on attack cardozo was left alone by terry and david luiz he came between the lines he was virtually left alone and nobody bothered to man mark him or follow him . jesus failed to notice this had he spotted this then he could had asked to cardozo to come out and make aimar play 1-2 with him or somebody other and told him to go beyond him . chelsea were trying to maintain the shape rather than man marking which needs to done to continental team if you got to stop you cannot play zonal with them or they will out pass you . you got to stop their flow and try to gain possession and make it count whenever you have it . to be honest chelsea had been lucky against benfica and had benefica played a little better then chelsea would had been in deep trouble .

chelsea cannot play like this against the likes of barcelona and let them play and just sit deep .

AB on April 5, 2012 at 3:46 pm

That Aimar is a gamer. How much longer before he leaves?

Death Ball on April 5, 2012 at 11:34 pm

That formation seems to be very popular in Football Manager since at least FM10.

That’s all.

Clarence on April 6, 2012 at 3:25 pm

I guess Chelsea will play a 4-2-1-3 with Mata and Ramires at flanks and Lampard, Essien, Mikel at the middle. Ramires will obviously play deeper and narrower to strengthen the midfield.

Max on April 6, 2012 at 5:00 pm

It’s a shame benfica got out. But i guess they learned they can’t play dirty like they do in Portugal especially javi and maxi.

In front of referring to the entire specifics of human growth hormone supplement,
it may be foremost vitally important to speak the
significance testosterone with regard to
as well as independently. That is generated by debris inside of the glands and as a result particular system, hormones circulation during the entire fluids, building up focused
activity all through the body shape its own matters.

Tyler on April 9, 2012 at 3:52 am

You spoke of “AVB’s 4-2-3-1 where wide players pressed fullbacks” as against “This 4-2-3-1 where wide players formed two banks of four.”

Might we not call the first a 4-2-1-3? Or is that something distinct in your mind?

I remember an article (you may even have linked to it) from Jonathan Wilson about the 4-2-1-3, and it seems to me the best way to differentiate the two is what the wide players do in the defensive phase. I’d be interested if you agree…

Gooney on April 9, 2012 at 5:25 am

Dear ZM,

What on earth has happened to City!? I don’t think many will be interested in an article on that but I am baffled on their inability to make simple passes anymore.

Attractive part of content. I just stumbled upon your website and in
accession capital to claim that I get in fact loved
account your weblog posts. Any way I’ll be subscribing to your augment or even I success you access persistently fast.